Lyngdorf MP-40 2.1 AV Processor Review

[amper42]

With a price that's about 500% higher than it should be, this AVR better not have any flaws and serve you breakfast each day too.

 

[amirm]

Is there a reason why we haven't we seen a single McIntosh (home) component tested? Has no one ever offered to send you one? Or is there some conflict of interest?

No conflict. A few people have offered to test their Mac gear but none came through at the end. I have also had offers of their older products but they weighed a ton so I passed.

 

[Mr. Widget]

Curious as to what you do for video upgrades. Do you use a separate video processor like lumagen/MadVR?
Or can you provide examples where you have upgraded the video portion whole still using MP 40?

Can you give an example of such a device (outboard HDMI switch)?

Thanks

Yes on Lumagen/MadVR if needed especially for projectors.

We typically use AVPro Edge as @elmoe420 mentioned. Their small 4 by 2 switch works really well for smaller projects, but we also use their larger switches/matrixes when needed. https://avproedge.com/products/ac-mx-42

 

[milosz]

This costs more than a serviceable used car.

 

[exm]

To those complaining about numbers of inputs: that's where the MP-60 2.1 comes into play.

 

[GXAlan]

You're more than welcome to purchase an overpriced piece of McIntosh gear and submit it for testing. I think that most people here realize that Mac is overpriced and then don't buy their gear.

I have some 20+ year old Mac speakers. Too heavy to ship. I know they'll perform poorly.

McIntosh MX100

The Sound of Science

www.erinsaudiocorner.com

The Mx100 which is based on a D&M platform is pretty good

And the automotive audio McIntosh amp tested here was pretty impressive too.

 

[Rja4000]

Linearity also shows a strange negative tilt at lower levels

That's interesting.

@amirm Is that an indication that there is some kind of Expander at play at low volume ?

I suppose the device includes a DSP anyway, so it's possible, isn't it ?

(Well, if they were doing that, I suppose the effect would have been much stronger..)


Didn't you measure dynamic range ?

 

[restorer-john]

Considering you are throwing 24 bit data at this thing, the THD is very ordinary in 2024. The left channel is barely 4db better than a CD player with 16bit data could do 35 years ago. There's numerous sub $200 D/A converters that are better.

The LPF with 44.1kHz white noise data is -14.2dB at FS/2 and that's "good"? Right.

The deviation from perfect linearity starts way before the 17bit mark.

If this simple testing of just two D/A converters in this unit (no exploration of any of the myriad decoding options) uncovers this amount of ill-matched, frankly unacceptable performance, what hope is there for the other 10 D/A converters you didn't test inside this US$11,299 AV processor? You'd think the two best matched and implemented D/As would be on the main L/R channels wouldn't you?

It's patently clear in my opinion, that this product is getting a way better review than it deserves, solely due to the name on the front. If it was Arcam or NAD or Marantz, it would have been savaged.

 

[Rja4000]

this product is getting a way better review than it deserves

Well, it doesn't seem too bad, objectively, if you compare with similar products.
You have to consider the category and the functionalities.

Of course, the price is sky high.

 

[NTK]

...
The LPF with 44.1kHz white noise data is -14.2dB at FS/2 and that's "good"? Right.
...

Audio ADC/DAC have always been designed for an usable upper frequency limit of 20 kHz. For fs = 44.1 kHz and for ADC, that leaves a zone of ~2 kHz (upper usable frequency to fs/2) for the analog anti-alias filter work with.

However, only those contents at frequencies above 24 kHz will "reflect" back to <20 kHz. That's why the full filter attenuation is specified at 24 kHz, not fs/2 or 22.05 kHz.
(Figure from link)

For DAC the concept is basically the same, only that the "images" always stay above fs/2 and thus the filter is less critical. Since it is assumed/given that the recorded contents do not have full amplitude signal from 20 kHz to 22.05 kHz, which for the DAC will images to 22.05 kHz to 24 kHz, full attenuation of the reconstruction filter is not necessary until >24 kHz (where the highest frequency contents in the designed usable frequency range will image to). 100 dB attenuation at 24 kHz is therefore good.

 

[amirm]

Didn't you measure dynamic range ?

OOps. I did but forgot to post it. Review updated with it:

 

[amirm]

It's patently clear in my opinion, that this product is getting a way better review than it deserves, solely due to the name on the front.

No it isn't:

It is on top-3 best AV products tested and one channel ties for best there is.

 

[restorer-john]

Audio ADC/DAC have always been designed for an usable upper frequency limit of 20 kHz.

Huh? Where did you get that idea? Soundstream's recorder was flat from DC-21kHz. DATs flat from DC-22kHz, it all depends on the sampling frequency. Now we have audio ADC/DACs on our desks that are flat to 180kHz.

Better tell Chord too, they clearly don't understand LPFs.

80-90dB attenuation after FS/2 is ideal.

 

[restorer-john]

It is on top-3 best AV products tested and one channel ties for best there is.

Amir, you're just testing the left and right channel D/A converters in pass through. It's acting as a D/A converter with a variable output and it gets special treatment because it has a million other functions you didn't test??

It's like just testing the reversing camera in a TOTL SUV and saying it ties for the Best Overall SUV because it was better than all the other reversing cameras...

I love your testing, you know that. But this is a complicated AV processor and you have not even scratched the surface. No recommendations can be given as to how good it is overall and plenty of misgiving can be assumed based on the poor showing of the part you have tested.

At some point, you'll either have to go full hog on AV processing testing or leave it to the guys with the full blown multichannel AV AP setups.

 

[beefkabob]

McIntosh MX100

The Sound of Science

www.erinsaudiocorner.com

The Mx100 which is based on a D&M platform is pretty good

And the automotive audio McIntosh amp tested here was pretty impressive too.

I would expect Mac gear to perform well these days, at least the solid state electronics, but I would not expect their old speakers to do well, and all their gear is still overpriced.

 

[Fidji]

I would love to discuss this with him. I'd be curious how he has come to that conclusion.

I am not sure how running RoomPerfect in the McIntosh based equipment differs from using it in Steinway Lyngdorf or Lyngdorf gear, but it is surprisingly simple. It can take as little as 15 minutes or longer depending on the room. The procedure is to set the mic at the primary listening position for an initial reading and you run the program... it will play its test tones through each speaker and then you randomly move the mic around the room changing the height and angle each time you run the test tones again. You continue to repeat this until the system has satisfactorily mapped the room. Depending on the room, this can take as little as four measurements or perhaps 8-10 for some rooms.

You then save the correction file and that is it... certainly not complicated.

The whole discussion was more of a small talk, while he was setting up Altitude at my place. If I remember correctly, customer [super VIP for them] wanted to have only blue VU meters so they opted for McIntosh Processor.

He was not complaining about the measurements as such, which I assume is pretty straightforward, but about how hard and time consuming is to get proper results, as Room Perfect is pretty automated and has only limited options for calibrator/end user to really influence the final result. So it ended with plebeian MiniDsp getting better results than Lyngdorf in managing multi-subs and helping Lyngdorf to sound acceptable for HT purposes. In his opinion it is more a lifestyle product for design conscious customers that works best in living rooms etc, but not for serious dedicated HT's.

 

[elmoe420]

The whole discussion was more of a small talk, while he was setting up Altitude at my place. If I remember correctly, customer [super VIP for them] wanted to have only blue VU meters so they opted for McIntosh Processor.

He was not complaining about the measurements as such, which I assume is pretty straightforward, but about how hard and time consuming is to get proper results, as Room Perfect is pretty automated and has only limited options for calibrator/end user to really influence the final result. So it ended with plebeian MiniDsp getting better results than Lyngdorf in managing multi-subs and helping Lyngdorf to sound acceptable for HT purposes. In his opinion it is more a lifestyle product for design conscious customers that works best in living rooms etc, but not for serious dedicated HT's.

I'm curious what would be found limiting with the Lyngdorf voicing system. Very comprehensive and you don't even need to use RoomPerfect, you can calibrate the whole thing by hand using REW or your choice of software.

The only limitation I know is trying to do BEQ is impossible with the current Voicings system.

 

[Mr. Widget]

In his opinion it is more a lifestyle product for design conscious customers that works best in living rooms etc, but not for serious dedicated HT's.

True it is pretty looking and is absolutely automated, though we usually also go into the settings and massage it a bit.

FWIW: I have never sold one that was not rack mounted in a dedicated equipment/projection room. The MP-60 2.1 is available with optional input/outputs making it fully DCI capable and we have set up a few DCI home cinemas with Dolby or Barco DCI cinema processors/projectors for film industry clients. The results have been spectacular.

 

[amirm]

Amir, you're just testing the left and right channel D/A converters in pass through. It's acting as a D/A converter with a variable output and it gets special treatment because it has a million other functions you didn't test??

Those special functions impact performance. These products have a chain of signal processing components. Each work independently which means each needs its own digital headroom to avoid overflow. The net result is that you loose good bit of dynamic range relative to a simple DAC.

When I first started testing these products, I rated them the same as 2-channel products. If I had continued, they would all get poor to fair results. In other words, someone looking for an excellent solution wouldn't find any and differentiation would get lost among the products. By creating their own category, they compete among each other. Should one of them at some point become competitive with 2-channel products, they would stand out and get the recognition they deserve.

 

[jhaider]

It's patently clear in my opinion, that this product is getting a way better review than it deserves, solely due to the name on the front. If it was Arcam or NAD or Marantz, it would have been savaged.

It were an Arcam or NAD or Marantz it wouldn’t have RoomPerfect. Room correction or other signal processing (e.g. loudness - which Lyngdorf doesn’t have but should - PEQ, crossover functions, etc) is the only sonic thing that makes a non-broken audio electronics box rise above me-too-whatever status.